the place of writing in english for military purposes

Adam ŚwiątekState University of Applied Sciences in Konin

University of Social Sciences in Warsaw

[email protected]

ORCID ID: 0000-0001-6861-8403

Magdalena BraszczyńskaMilitary University of Technology in Warsaw

[email protected]

ORCID ID: 0000-0002-2308-4361

The Place of Writing in English for Military Purposes

Abstract: Since ESP language trainings are becoming increasingly popular in professional communities and among university students, their impact and therefore academic value seem to be enormous nowadays. As a result, apart from the very general language training, contemporary university education enables students to get access to professional corpuses, often containing the terminology that is simply unavailable in regular courses or at least limited to an absolute minimum. However, apart from teaching the intended professional terminology, ESP courses often require teachers to make their students familiar with a wide range of skills, such as negotiating the meaning or transferring specific cultural values from one language to

DOI 10.36145/DoC2020.17

90 Adam Świątek, Magdalena Braszczyńska

another. When it comes to Military English, writing skills seem to be even more important than speaking and other language aspects, since it often requires military students and then soldiers to communicate various cultural phenomena when contacting professionals from other countries. This article focuses on the phenomenon of writing skills in Military English, including the phenomenon of mediation as a variable that often requires students to negotiate the meaning in order to transfer specific information. As a result, the theoretical part of this article presents the issues of ME from various perspectives, whereas the empirical part reveals the attitude of the students of the Military University of Technology in Warsaw towards the discussed issue and therefore the possible suggestions concerning the use of this type of a popular ESP framework.

Key words: writing, Military English, ESP, STANAG

Introduction

Whether it be a regular language course or specialised language training,

contemporary requirements in the field of university language education

seem to have modified the way teachers approach this phenomenon.

Therefore, apart from developing their general language competence,

university students often need go beyond what they have been used to and

thus become familiar with a completely different issue related to language

education, i.e. a particular type of a specialised language, characteristic for

their specific field of studies. Complex as the phenomenon is, maintaining

a united front and therefore a balance between the general and specialised

types of language competence seems to be vital in terms of students’

final success. Furthermore, in order to become highly competitive on the

contemporary job market and thus face an opportunity to choose from

among an array of job offers, the knowledge of specialised languages

seem to be the essence of what the modern entrepreneurs expect as well

as what language education has truly become.

91The Place of Writing in English for Military Purposes

Since the above-described phenomenon tends to be highly

complex, multifaceted and thus based on a myriad of interrelated

factors and even social and economic regulations, this article focuses

on a specific type of an English for Specific Purposes (ESP) language,

i.e. Military English. According to Malenica and Fabijanić (2013),

Military English ought to be understood as the type of specialised

language that deals with the highly restrictive taxonomy of the

military lexicon and thus contains numerous abbreviations and lexical

terms characteristic for the military sector of the national identity.

Furthermore, Cannon (1989) and Lopez Rua (2004) pinpoint that

military typologies often contain multiple discrepancies that need to

be thoroughly analysed and accounted for in order to standardise them

and avoid inconsistencies when approached by particular language

users. Harley (2006) adds that the military lexicon also tends to reveal

a high degree of productivity, and it belongs to the so-called active

and living part of the entire corpus of English language terminology,

often enriched by a multitude of neologisms created on a regular basis

in order to meet the needs of the current situation. As a corollary, all

of the above-mentioned features contribute to the fact that Military

English constitutes a complex issue and thus needs to be approached

in a careful and detailed way.

However, when it comes to Military English and the four major

language skills, it is not speaking, reading or listening that poses

difficulties. As a result, writing tends to become the most problematic

skill, since it requires students to be specific, brief and as clear as

possible in order to avoid mistakes and potential misunderstandings.

Furthermore, when dealing with writing skills in military contexts,

students often need to negotiate the meaning and mediate with

international partners from such organisations as NATO or United

Nations, which often seems to be culturally conditioned. That is why


students of military faculties need to be aware of a myriad of common

language features and military terminology as well as specific cultural

values and issues related to military contexts in the countries they

cooperate with, mainly in order to mediate successfully and thus reach

a consensus. Finally, writing is one of the major components as regards

the STANAG examination, i.e. the most respected military form of

language certification of the future professional soldiers.

This article deals with the issue of mediation in military

writing, and it consists of two parts. In the theoretical part, the authors

present various theoretical issues related to Military English and its

features, including the place of Military English in the ESP framework.

Furthermore, this part characterises military students and the

STANAG examination in terms of writing skills in order to introduce

the reader to the vital requirements regarding this component of the

above-mentioned type of examination. As far as the empirical part is

concerned, the authors aimed to investigate the participants’ attitude

towards military writing skills at particular stages of their language

training at the Military University of Technology in Warsaw as well as

their opinions regarding the features of military writing that posed the

biggest difficulties to them.

ESP courses and the place of Military

English

According to Long (2005), teaching general English seems to be similar to

the type of teaching that has no clearly specified purpose, which means

that teachers have a tendency to implement too many unnecessary items

in order to teach as much as possible within a particular period of time.

That is why it is highly recommended to introduce teaching for a specific


purpose, since, according to Hyland (2002, as cited in Belcher, 2009, p. 1),

“commitment to the goal of providing language instruction that addresses

students’ own language learning purposes is what those who take an

English for Specific Purposes (ESP) approach see as distinguishing it from

other approaches to English Language Teaching (ELT).”

However, in order to understand the issue of ESP properly, it

seems to be worth analysing what ESP truly is. To start with, Hutchinson

and Waters (Donesch-Jezo, 2012, p. 2) define ESP as “an approach to

language learning which is based on learner need […] and in which all

decisions as to content and method are based on the learner’s reason

for learning”. Furthermore, Dudley-Evans and St. John (1998, p. 5)

maintain that ESP is the type of a language that reveals numerous,

unique characteristics, both absolute (specific needs and underlying

methodology, appropriate language elements) and variable (specific

disciplines, modified methodology allowed, designed mostly for adults

and advanced learners, partly based on the basic knowledge of the target

language). Plesca (2016) pinpoints that the term ESP refers to the type

of discourse implemented in a specific working environment in order to

suit the needs of the intended profession and facilitate the process of

information flow in a variety of professional contexts.

When it comes to ESP courses, officially developed and first

presented to the public in the 1960s, the teacher needs to conduct

a thorough analysis of the specific character of the ESP type of written

and spoken discourse before implementing and thus addressing their

students’ needs. In other words, the teacher needs to be aware of the

multiple character of ESP courses, i.e. their types and specific features.

As a corollary, Hyland (2006, as cited in Belcher, 2009, pp. 2–3) divided

ESP courses into the following two categories:

• English for Academic Purposes (EAP), designed for university

students in order to address their academic needs, and


• English for Occupational Purposes (EOP), designed

for an array of professional communities, such as lawyers,

businesspeople, doctors, etc.

There are also other, less-known categories of ESP courses, which

constitute hybrids of the above-mentioned types of ESP phenomena, and

these are EALP (English for Academic Legal Purposes) or EABP (English

for Academic Business Purposes), among others (Hyland, 2006, as cited

in Belcher, 2009, pp. 2–3).

As far as Military English (ME) is concerned, i.e. the subject of this

article, Orna-Montesinos (2013, pp. 87–88) claims that ME is the type

of a language that tends to be used in military contexts and constitutes

the vital outcome of the progressive process of “globalisation of

military conflicts” as well as “integration of armies in multinational and

multicultural coalition forces”. That is why, as a contemporary lingua

franca, English has become the major language tool responsible for the

“interconnection between individuals and organisations, between the

national and the international” as well as “between the local and the

global”. As a result, ME deals with an array of military areas, such as

day-to-day communication among soldiers, international cooperation,

military unions and treaties, armed forces, missions and weapons,

modern warfare, etc. Complex as it is, ME constitutes one of the most

attractive scenarios when developing the language skills of military

cadets, who aim to become professional soldiers and thus become active

and regular participants of international military communication and

instruction. When it comes to the place of ME in the ESP framework, it

has become an important part of the EOP taxonomy of language types

designed for particular professional communities; one of them is the

North Atlantic Treaty Organization (commonly referred to as NATO).


NATO requirements concerning Military

English

Together with the requirements of the Polish Armed Forces School of

Languages, the Standardisation Agreement (STANAG) provides all

NATO forces with a thorough description of language proficiency levels

(STANAG, 2009, p. 4) and thus allows the Department of Education of

the Ministry of National Defence to implement the so-called Framework

Programme established for English language education in the Polish

Armed Forces, herein ‘Ramowy Program Nauczania Języka Angielskiego

w Siłach Zbrojnych RP Edycja III’ (2019). As a corollary, it is a fundamental

tool applied through the process of writing curricula and syllabuses for the

Polish Armed Forces (Ramowy Program Nauczania Języka Angielskiego

w Siłach Zbrojnych RP Edycja III, 2019, p. 5).

When it comes to Military English, the second level of Ramowy

Program Nauczania Języka Angielskiego w Siłach Zbrojnych RP Edycja

III (2019) adopts an approach that contains an array of military topics

selected according to the intended military graduates’ ability to carry

out their official duties only to a limited extent (Ramowy Program

Nauczania Języka Angielskiego w Siłach Zbrojnych RP Edycja III, 2019,

p. 24). At the third level, on the other hand, the topics are selected in

a way that enables graduates to perform their duties at a minimum of

professional level (Ramowy Program Nauczania Języka Angielskiego

w Siłach Zbrojnych RP Edycja III, 2019, p. 35). Therefore, the military

topics at the above-mentioned levels are as follows:

Table 1. Military English topics

Level 2 Level 3

Military English

Military ranks, all forces’ basic weapons systems

Military ranks – nomenclature and comparison


Armed forces, services: organization of a particular type of armed forces, equipment and armament of soldiers of a particular type of armed forces and service, weapon systems of a particular type of armed forces and service

Armed forces, services: basic organization of armed forces, organization of a particular type of armed forces, basic equipment and armament of soldiers, equipment and armament of soldiers of a particular type of armed forces and service, weapon systems of particular armed forces and service, nomenclature of a particular weapon system

Military service: education and training, military career, basic instruction and documents

Military service: education and training, military career, basic instruction and prescriptive documents

Military exercises: basic warfare, field training exercises, multinational exercises, basis of commands

Military exercises: warfare, field training exercises, multinational exercises, C4I – Command, Control, Communication, Computers, Intelligence, elements of commands

International cooperation: NATO and working abroad, international military units, peacekeeping missions, humanitarian missions

International cooperation: NATO and working abroad, international military units, peacekeeping missions, humanitarian missions, operations as part of disarmament treaties

Basic abbreviations in military documents

Routine correspondence – written and conducted by technical means of communication

Current, worldwide political and military affairs

Weapons of mass destruction – its operation, international agreements, current political and military affairs

Source: Authors’ own elaboration on the basis of Ramowy Program Naucza-nia Języka Angielskiego w Siłach Zbrojnych RP Edycja III (2019).

When analysing the topics attributed to levels 2 and 3, it can be

pinpointed that the areas of interest are almost identical. However,

a significant difference lies in the fact that the topics maintained at level 3


are substantially broadened. Therefore, they are not limited and context-

reduced but a lot more complex and advanced. This factor determines

the level of STANAG examinations themselves and thus makes them

considerably much more difficult to pass. Another difference between

the above-mentioned levels of Military English topics is the fact that

level 3 exam evaluates whether cadets are knowledgeable enough about

military vocabulary, which seems to be essential when comprehending

political and military affairs.

STANAG exam and its major assumptions

The major aim of the STANAG examination is to assess candidates’

linguistic competence in accordance with the Standardisation Agreement

(Model egzaminu z języka angielskiego Poziom 3 STANAG 6001, 2018,

p. 6). However, this type of examination has been developed not only for

members of the Polish Armed Forces but also military related personnel

(Model egzaminu z języka angielskiego Poziom 2 STANAG 6001, 2019,

p. 6), which is why STANAG assesses candidates’ linguistic competence

regardless of the curriculum (Model egzaminu z języka angielskiego

Poziom 2 STANAG 6001, 2019, p. 6). There are five levels of linguistic

competence distinguished by STANAG 6001, and these are:

• Level 0 – no proficiency,

• Level 1 – survival,

• Level 2 – functional,

• Level 3 – professional,

• Level 4 – expert,

• Level 5 – higly-articulate native (STANAG, 2009, p. 5).

As far as assessment is concerned, STANAG measures candidates’

linguistic competence in terms of the four major language skills, i.e.

listening, speaking, reading, and writing. However, levels 4 and 5 are


not implemented in the Polish Army, whereas level 5 examination is not

even available (Decyzja Nr 73/MON, 2020, p. 5).

Having taken the STANAG examination, a candidate achieves

a Standard Language Profile (SLP) depicted in the form of 4 digits. They

are inalterably listed in the following order:

• Skill L, standing for Listening

• Skill S, standing for Speaking

• Skill R, standing for Reading

• Skill W, standing for Writing (STANAG, 2009, p. 5).

As a corollary, a candidate’s profile defined as SLP 3231 ought to

be interpreted as listening level 3, speaking level 2, reading level 3, and

writing level 1 (STANAG, 2009, p. 5).

As far as the examination itself is concerned, candidates are

obliged to carry out particular tasks within the given time-limit as well

as to deal with an array of distinct tasks, especially when it comes to

reading and listening components aimed to evaluate a cadet’s level of

comprehension of specific types of texts. The speaking part, on the other

hand, aims to investigate a candidate’s readiness to have conversations

on particular topics. Finally, when it comes to STANAG writing skills, the

authors specify the requirements concerning this component in details

in the further sections of this article.

In order to pass the given part of the STANAG examination,

a candidate needs to score 70% (Decyzja Nr 73/MON, 2020, p. 4), which

means 14 points (out of 20) (Model egzaminu z języka angielskiego

Poziom 2 STANAG 6001, 2019; Model egzaminu z języka angielskiego

Poziom 3 STANAG 6001, 2018), and they retake only the components that

they have failed.


Military students’ needs and requirements

The Commandant-rector of the Military University of Technology

provides cadets with proper language education in order for graduates to

obtain the profile determined as SLP 3232. (Decyzja Nr 73/MON, 2020,

p. 10). However, this cannot be considered and therefore treated as an

opportunity for students but rather a professional requirement, since this

condition must be met by all military students in order to take the officer

exam (Decyzja Nr 73/MON, 2020, p. 10).

The above-mentioned Standard Language Profile (SLP) reveals

that all students need to obtain listening level 3, speaking level 2,

reading level 3, and writing level 2. However, in order to understand the

needs of military students in terms of language education, the target

skills ought to be examined according to the official standards regarding

the STANAG examination. As a corollary, when it comes to the area of

listening, a candidate ought to comprehend (STANAG, 2009, p. 7):

• a majority of formal and informal speech as regards practical,

social and professional issues, including particular interests and spe-

cial fields of competence,

• an interlocutor talking ‘with normal speed and clarity in

a standard dialect’, understood as the face-to-face type of interaction,

• language at interactive meetings and briefings, including the

vocabulary related to unknown subjects and situations,

• the essentials of conversations made by educated native spe-

akers, lectures on common topics and special fields of competence,

• moderately clear telephone calls and media broadcasts,

• language-related hypotheses, backing opinions, stating and

defending policies, argumentation, objections and elaboration,

• abstract concepts through multi-topic discussions involving

such areas of knowledge as economics, culture, science, technology

and candidates’ professional fields,


• explicit and implicit information (spoken),

• different stylistic levels,

• humour, emotional nuances and subtleties.

What is more, military students seldom need repetition,

paraphrasing or additional explanations, and they can handle speech at

a fast pace of delivery, i.e. native speakers using slang, regionalisms or

dialects (STANAG, 2009, p. 7). As a corollary, when it comes to speaking

skills, a candidate ought to:

• exchange verbal information in everyday social and profes-

sional situations,

• characterise people, places and things,

• narrate present, past and future events,

• present facts,

• compare and contrast,

• give instructions and directions,

• ask and answer expected queries,

• hold conversations on various topics related to job procedu-

res, family, personal background, personal interests, travel and cur-

rent events,

• be able to handle detailed discussions regarding typical daily

communicative situations on such topics as personal and accommo-

dation-related interactions,

• ‘interact with native speakers not used to speaking with non-

-natives, although natives may have to adjust to some limitations.’

As far as speaking and therefore sentence-related issues are

concerned, military students are also evaluated in terms of joining

sentences into paragraphs and thus controlling the proper usage of

the most basic grammatical structures. However, when it comes to

more complex forms, their usage seems to be a distinct issue, since the

terminology selected by the candidate is usually correct in common


utterances, but it may be inappropriate in a multitude of other situations

(STANAG, 2009, p. 8).

When it comes to the area of reading skills, a candidate ought to:

• comprehend various authentic texts related to general and

professional topics,

• learn while reading,

• comprehend various contexts related to the news, informatio-

nal and editorial articles in prestigious magazines for educated nati-

ves, personal and professional correspondence, reports and materials

in special fields of competence,

• comprehend language-related hypotheses, backing opinions,

argumentation, clarification and elaboration,

• relate ideas,

• comprehend abstract concepts in multi-topic texts, usually

related to the areas of economics, culture, science, technology and

candidates’ professional fields,

• comprehend explicit and implicit information (written),

• comprehend an array of stylistic levels,

• identify humour, emotional nuances and subtleties.

It is also worth mentioning that military students need to

interpret the written content accurately, which means that they may

sometimes require some assistance as regards various issues related to

uncommonly sophisticated texts containing rare idioms or numerous

cultural components. Finally, when compared with a native reader,

a candidate’s pace of reading may be much slower (STANAG, 2009, p. 11).

To conclude, after graduation from the Military University of

Technology, military graduates’ writing (to be discussed in the following

sections of this article) and speaking skills allow them to function

effectively in their professional environment. When it comes to reading

and listening skills, they are at a minimum of the so-called professional


level. That is why the following paragraph of this article concentrates

on the issue of community of practice in order to provide the reader

with a myriad of definitions of this term and thus clarify the fact that the

Military University of Technology is one of the best instances as regards

effective language learning communities.

Military University of Technology as

a community of practice

Introduced by Lave and Wenger (1991), a community of practice ought to

be understood as a group of people who treat learning as a clearly social

process strengthened by a multitude of specific factors intended to make

it as effective as possible. In 1998, Wenger added that in order to establish

a community of practice, a group of people needs to have a similar goal and

share multiple similarities, such as the use of characteristic terminology,

practices, etc. In consequence, all the members follow similar patterns

and act in a way that defines them and thus distinguishes from among

other communities of practice. Finally, a single person can belong to

a number of communities of practice as long as the major rules, features

and goals are followed and sustained. Ostermann (2008, p. 1), on the other

hand, defines a community of practice as “a group of people who share

similar interests and objectives”. Furthermore, a community of practice

has a clear tendency to define their own language, intended practices and

artifacts they are planning to implement. It is also worth mentioning that

communities of practice establish links between individuals and groups of

people in the large network of social relationships in the public.

Li et al. (2009) pinpoint that the emergence and then existence

of each community of practice ought to be based on the three essential

components, which are mutual engagement, joint enterprise and shared

repertoire. As far as the initial one is concerned, it represents the


entire paradigm of the interaction between the members of the target

community of practice. When it comes to joint enterprise, this component

resembles cooperation between the members in order to achieve their

common goals. Finally, shared repertoire refers to all the resources

a community of practice possesses, i.e. values, routines, behaviours, etc.

Holmes and Meyerhoff (1999) pinpoint another essential aspect

of communities of practice and maintain that they are living cells, and

their character is dynamic even though communities of practice are

rich in features and comprise complex structures. Modifications take

place due to practices, i.e. the experience and interaction between the

members and other communities of practice. Finally, it is necessary to

remember that entering a new community of practice is always based on

learning and assimilation of various aspects that are characteristic for

the target group. That is why the extent to which a person assimilates

the new framework determines whether the new member is going to

succeed and thus function properly and become a full member of the

intended community of practice. Similar views were also presented by

other researchers, such as Barab and Duffy (2012) or Hoadley (2012).

When it comes to Military English, one of the most valuable

and respected communities of practice is the Military University of

Technology in Warsaw, where professional soldiers and cadets aim

to pursue the same goals and thus share a myriad of characteristic

features that allow them to implement effective practices and succeed

in various initiatives.

Since military studies differ from civilian studies in a considerable

way, MUT’s cadets study military (one day a week) and technical subjects

(four days a week) simultaneously. Therefore, the military training aims

to prepare students for their professional service in the Polish Armed

Forces, and it is identical for all the students, regardless of the target

field of study. There are also two modes of the military training, i.e. the


basic one, referred to as the Initial Entry Training, and the officer’s one.

Furthermore, as part of the military training, cadets have a wide range of

university classes, such as command and control, tactics, peacekeeping

operations, SERE (Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape), shooting

practice and theory, anti-aircraft defence, weapons of mass destruction

defence, fire support and medical support. Additionally, they take part

in numerous specialist training courses in military training centers

and army units, and they undergo an intensive training aimed to serve

as squat commanders and, finally, platoon commanders (https://www.

wat.edu.pl/ksztalcenie/rekrutacja/studia-wojskowe/zycie-studenta

podchorazego/ksztalcenie-wojskowe/).

Due to the fact that military studies are full-time, graduates receive

the professional title of Master of Science – engineer, and then they are

appointed to the rank of the second lieutenant (https://www.wat.edu.pl/

en/military-university-of-technology/mut/). What is more, since the

initial day of their studies, military students become active members of the

army, and they are accommodated at a military campus, where they have

various additional duties that are not related to their studies. Being a soldier

is also reflected in the fact that military students follow a strict military

discipline before and after their regular classes (https://www.wojsko-

polskie.pl/wat/studia-wojskowe-czym-roznia-sie-studia-wojskowe-od-

cywilnych/). They also need to be extremely fit, hence their day starts

with a morning run that covers 2–3 kilometres. However, the University

provides their cadets with a full access to various sports facilities,

such as a stadium and a swimming pool, sports halls, tennis courts, etc.

(https://www.wat.edu.pl/ksztalcenie/rekrutacja/studia-wojskowe/

zycie-studenta-podchorazego/przykladowy-plan-dnia/). That is why

all the above-mentioned issues contribute to the fact that MUT students

comprise an effective and community of practice that succeeds not only

in language learning but also a myriad of social initiatives.


Teaching writing in military contexts

In contrast with teaching the military personnel at various residential and

remedy courses and thus considering each skill separately, cadets at the

Military University of Technology are always taught integrated language

skills, which means that the four major skills are properly balanced in order

to achieve the intended learning objectives (Ramowy Program Nauczania

Języka Angielskiego w Siłach Zbrojnych RP Edycja III, 2019, p. 39).

However, when it comes to teaching military writing at level 2,

there is no textbook for this skill and, as a result, teachers are forced to

use various materials selected on the basis of their practical experience.

Furthermore, in accordance with the syllabus of the MUT School of Foreign

Languages, there are individual classes devoted to military writing. It is

therefore determined by the STANAG examination requirements as well

as by the fact that this skill is the most time-consuming of all. Due to that

approach, the program’s recommendations as regards military writing

are fully respected (Ramowy Program Nauczania Języka Angielskiego

w Siłach Zbrojnych RP Edycja III, 2019, pp. 41–42).

In compliance with the program’s recommendations, STANAG

agreement requirements as regards teaching writing at level 2, and

PAFSL examination papers, writing classes are conducted in order to

teach students private and professional writing along with an appropriate

register and text organization. As a corollary, private letters, assessment

reports, incident reports, formal letters (a letter of complaint, a letter

of inquiry, a letter of application) are commonly practiced. As there is

no textbook for military writing at level 2, MUT’s language teachers

use a combination of general English textbooks for successful writing

and self-prepared materials for military reports. What is more, MUT’s

language teachers designed a specific e-learning course aimed to

develop writing skills for the STANAG 2 type of examination, and this


course can be used either during classes or for self-study (https://e-

-learning.wat.edu.pl/).

Writing standards and exam requirements

According to the Standardisation Agreement (STANAG, 2009, p. 12), a level-

two candidate ought to be able to deal with the following writing issues:

• simple personal, routine workplace correspondence as well

as various documents related to everyday topics (memoranda, brief

reports, private letters),

• stating facts,

• giving instructions,

• describing people, places and things.

• referring to present, past and future activities, most com-

monly formulated in simple but complete paragraphs,

• ‘combining and linking sentences into connected prose.’

What is more, when evaluating writing skills, the teacher is

supposed to investigate whether the paragraphs written by a candidate

cohere with the other ones. In other words, students need to know how

to organise ideas in accordance with the main points of the target task

or simple sequence of events. That is why the teacher needs to evaluate

whether the ideas have been related clearly, and the transitions between

them are logical. This situation stems from the fact that candidates

usually control simple, commonly used grammatical structures, but

they face difficulties when practicing more complex structures and

thus refrain from using them. As far as vocabulary is concerned, it

may be used incorrectly, which means that students can make use of

a number of circumlocutions in order to compensate for their lack of

knowledge. Finally, there is a possibility of distortion of meaning due to

a candidate’s grammar, vocabulary, spelling and punctuation difficulties

(STANAG, 2009, p. 12).


When it comes to assessment in terms of writing skills at level 2,

there are two tasks that need to be carried out within 75 minutes. As

a corollary, in task one, students need to write a private or official e-mail

(150–200 words), whereas in task two, students need to complete a report

(150–200 words). As far as instructions are concerned, they are issued

in Polish or English; however, all of the examination rubrics are written

in English (examples are not provided). The skills that are required to

pass this part of the exam are thanking, expressing opinions, refusing,

describing people, places and things, describing past, present and future

events, giving reasons, apologising, stating facts, giving information,

explaining, expressing dissatisfaction, making requests and inviting.

Finally, when it comes to the expected performance, candidates ought

to write about everyday life and job-related issues, and thus formulate

full paragraphs that consist of simple and complex sentences. However,

the task must be grammatically and lexically correct, logical and

coherent. The test is then assessed by two examiners, and in order to

pass it, a candidate must score at least 14 points (out of 20) for both tasks

(10 points for each task) (Model egzaminu z języka angielskiego Poziom

2 STANAG 6001, 2019, p. 9). The marking criteria (Model egzaminu

z języka angielskiego Poziom 2 STANAG 6001, 2019, p. 36) have been

divided into the so-called point bands, such as language resources,

accuracy, organisation, and task achievement. As far as candidates’

writing competence at level two is concerned, it is evaluated according

to the following criteria:


Table 2. STANAG – level 2 writing criteria

Source: Model egzaminu z języka angielskiego Poziom 2 STANAG 6001 (2019).


The above-presented table reveals that candidates’ performance

is assessed individually in each band, and the final result depends on the

lowest score achieved in a particular band. In other words, it is possible

that a candidate gets 10 points for language resources, accuracy and

organisation, but only 6 points for task achievement, and this means that

their final result is only 6 points. This makes the scoring system a unique

framework and thus forces candidates to treat their writing tasks as

a whole. Finally, it affects candidates’ individual paths of development,

as it requires practical knowledge and skills in order to perform and

pass the intended writing tasks.

Since the above-mentioned criteria seem to be relatively

restrictive, it is therefore significant to find out what cadets truly think

about the issue of writing skills as well as what their attitude towards this

part of the exam is. As a corollary, the authors conducted research at the

Military University of Technology in Warsaw in order to collect valuable

information as regards writing skills in terms of the STANAG examination.

The researchMethodology and aims

The aim of this research was to investigate military students’ attitude

towards Military English writing, which is one of the major components of

the STANAG examination and therefore a prerequisite for cadets in terms

of graduation from the Military University of Technology. As a corollary, the

authors investigated cadets’ feedback as regards the difficulty of military

writing itself as well as the potential obstacles faced when dealing with

this component during the STANAG examination session. Additionally,

the authors decided to find out more about the potential usefulness of

writing skills in the cadets’ future careers as well as the solutions that

might be implemented in order to deal with the exam more effectively.


Finally, the authors compared the opinions and suggestions provided by

the cadets representing particular years of studies and military faculties

in order to evaluate their attitudes towards military writing skills before

and after the STANAG exam.

As far as methodology is concerned, the authors decided to make

use of the following research methods in order to raise the effectiveness

of the presented research:

• the questionnaire method (aimed to collect data as regards

the cadets’ opinions in terms of military writing),

• the comparative and contrastive methods (aimed to compare

and therefore contrast the obtained data, i.e. the cadets’ opinions and

information provided in the survey),

• the individual case analysis method (aimed to analyse and

present each cadet’s feedback individually and thus reach additional

conclusions).

Instruments and procedure

In order to complete this research successfully and thus collect proper

data, the authors designed a questionnaire consisting of 14 questions

(6 of the questions dealt with the data regarding the participants’ general

information in order to profile them, whereas the remaining 8 questions

focused on various aspects of the investigated issues), both of the open-

ended and closed-ended nature. Therefore, apart from choosing from

among the characteristics mentioned by the authors, the cadets had an

opportunity to provide their own explanations concerning particular

points of the questionnaire, which often contained valuable information

and thus enabled the authors to find out even more than it had been

expected. Additionally, it is worth mentioning that due to the COVID-19

pandemic, the questionnaire was distributed online.


As far as the research questions are concerned, and therefore

the questionnaire itself, the initial six elements focused on such issues

as the cadets’ age, gender, year of studies at MUT, selected faculties,

knowledge of foreign languages as well as STANAG 2 examination, i.e.

its positive outcome at the time of this study. In other words, this stage

of the presented research allowed the authors to establish a certain

background as regards the subjects and thus proceed to the other stage

which aimed to investigate the target issues related to military writing.

As a corollary, the other 8 elements of the questionnaire investigated

the cadets’ approaches, attitudes and opinions regarding:

• the importance of the four major language skills, i.e. reading,

writing, speaking, and listening, rated from ‘the most important’ to

‘unimportant at all’; the subjects had an opportunity to add their own

comments and opinions;

• the significance of Military English writing skills during the

cadets’ studies at MUT; rated from ‘very significant’ to ‘difficult to dec-

lare’; additional comments might have been added;

• the usefulness of the four major language skills in the cadets’

future professions; rated from ‘the most important’ to ‘unimportant at

all’; the subjects had an opportunity to provide their own explanations;

• the usefulness of Military English writing skills in the cadets’

future professions; rated from ‘very significant’ to ‘difficult to declare’;

additional comments might have been added;

• the usefulness of specific Military English writing skills (a pri-

vate e-mail, an office e-mail – asking for information, a formal e-mail

– a complaint, a formal e-mail – a covering letter, a military report –

an assessment report, a military report – an incident report) in the

cadets’ future professions; rated from ‘very significant’ to ‘difficult to

declare’; additional comments might have been added;


• the difficulties with Military English writing skills; rated from

‘I definitely agree’ to ‘I completely disagree’; the cadets had an oppor-

tunity to provide additional comments and opinions as well as expla-

nations regarding the problems that they had already faced and how

they had solved them;

• the difficulty of specific Military English writing skills (a pri-

vate e-mail, an office e-mail – asking for information, a formal e-mail

– a complaint, a formal e-mail – a covering letter, a military report –

an assessment report, a military report – an incident report) from an

individual perspective; rated from ‘very difficult’ to ‘hard to say’;

• the areas of potential difficulties with Military English writing

skills when dealing with the STANAG 2 examination; the cadets had

an opportunity to choose from among such issues as general vocabu-

lary, military vocabulary, grammar, time or type of task; additional

areas might have been mentioned by the cadets;

When it comes to the research procedure, it consisted of two

stages. Therefore, before the questionnaire was distributed to the

target group of participants, the authors had distributed a sample of the

intended instrument to a group of randomly selected MUT’s students in

order to validate it and thus confirm that the intended tool was properly

understood and, in consequence, fulfilled its aim. At the following, second

stage of the presented investigation, the questionnaire was distributed

via Google documents to the target group of participants, which allowed

the authors to analyse the target data effectively. Having collected the

necessary information, the authors conducted two independent pieces

of analysis, i.e. collective and individual, and then reached an array of

conclusions.


Participants

As far as the participants are concerned, 38 respondents (36 males and

2 females) participated in this research. All of them were native speakers

of Polish, and they represented second-year, third-year and fourth-

year military students who agreed to become active participants of the

survey. They were also students of an array of fields, i.e. mechanics and

mechanical engineering, mechatronics, safety engineering, construction,

and computer science. The choice of the respondents stems from the

fact that all of them had already taken part in the STANAG 2 examination

(at least once) and thus gained some experience in writing military texts

during the course of their studies.

Results and findings

In order to investigate the aims related to the issue of writing in Military

English, the authors decided to concentrate on the following aspects:

• the importance of writing at university,

• the significance of writing in the military students’ professio-

nal careers,

• difficulties in writing,

• obstacles encountered during the 6001 STANAG exam.

To start with, when it comes to the importance of writing skills

during the cadets’ studies, the authors obtained the following results:

• 100% of the second-year cadets found writing very significant,

• 79% of the third-year cadets found writing important,

• 58% of the fourth-year cadets shared the view that writing

ought to be treated as a significant language skill.

Those respondents who perceived writing as an essential skill (in

total: 79%) maintained that they needed this skill in order to pass exams,


write reports concerning their missions abroad, make their future

careers easier, use writing at work, write reports and other documents,

and even get promoted. Furthermore, some of the cadets pinpointed that

writing is the main form of indirect contact, and it is a very useful skill

that should be possessed by any professional officer serving in the army.

Those who did not consider writing important (in total: 16%) claimed

that they would always use the Internet, which means that English would

probably not be treated as necessary at work.

When it comes to the importance of writing skills in the

respondents’ professional careers, the following results were obtained:

• 92% of the second-year cadets found writing very significant,

• 71% of the third-year students found writing important,

• 33% of the fourth-year students shared the view that writing

was significant.

It should also be stressed out that 33% of the fourth-year students

could not decide on the most appropriate answer, and this seemed to be

connected with the fact that the most experienced cadets were already

aware of the importance of military writing (in total: 66% of all of the

respondents), which was mainly applied when cooperating with foreign

countries and NATO armies, communicating with foreign soldiers and

writing reports. The other respondents pinpointed that military writing

made it easier for them to perform their duties, and Polish soldiers

ought to be able to communicate with NATO soldiers and thus follow

the requirements issued by this international organisation. However,

some of the respondents maintained that writing was not significant for

them since they could use the Internet, which then diminished the role

of English at their work. Additionally, their friends did not use English in

their working environment.

In the following part of this survey, the respondents were asked

to express their opinions regarding two specific aspects of the texts that


are practiced during their Military English classes, i.e. their difficulty

and importance in the professional career. As a corollary, when it comes

to the issue of difficulty, the following results were obtained:

• ‘personal e-mail’ – not difficult for 82% of all of the respondents,

• ‘routine letter of inquiry’ – not difficult for 55% of all of the

respondents,

• ‘routine letter of complaint’ – not difficult for 55% of all of the

respondents,

• ‘routine letter of application’ – not difficult for 47% of all of the

respondents,

• ‘assessment report’ – not difficult for 48% of all of the

respondents,

• ‘incident report’ – not difficult for 47% of all of the respondents.

As far as usefulness is concerned, the results were as follows:

• ‘personal e-mail’ – important for 68% of all of the respondents,

• ‘routine letter of inquiry’ – important for 92% of all of the

respondents,

• ‘routine letter of complaint’ – important for 58% of all of the

respondents,

• ‘routine letter of application’ – important for 58% of all of the

respondents,

• ‘assessment report’ – important for 79% of all of the

respondents,

• ‘incident report’ – important for 66% of all of the respondents.

On the basis of the results presented above, the authors

concluded that the respondents perceived ‘routine letters of inquiry’

and ‘assessment reports’ as the most useful military texts in their

professional careers. It is therefore an important piece of feedback for

teachers because military students are much more aware of what might

be necessary in their future work.


The following question of the presented survey concerned the

most common obstacles faced by the cadets when dealing with Military

English writing. The results were as follows:

• 42% of the second-year cadets faced no difficulties when dealing

with Military English writing; however, 25% of them could not decide,

• 86% of the third-year students faced no problems,

• 75% of the fourth-year students shared the view that writing

was not problematic.

Those who found writing difficult maintained that their problems

arose from a lack of vocabulary and ideas as well as difficulties with

grammar. However, according to the respondents, various solutions

ought to be taken into consideration in order to deal with the potential

obstacles, and these were ready-to-use expressions or phrases and parts

of compositions, to be learnt by heart.

Another issue investigated in the survey focused on the

difficulties encountered by the respondents when taking the STANAG

6001 writing examination. As a corollary, the subjects mentioned such

examples of obstacles as general vocabulary, military vocabulary,

grammar, time-limits and types of tasks. When it comes to details, the

results were as follows:

• ‘general vocabulary’, selected by 26% of all of the respondents

(second-year – 33%, third-year – 0,1%, fourth year – 42%),

• ‘military vocabulary’, selected by 47% of all of the subjects

(second-year – 67%, third-year – 21%, fourth year – 58%),

• ‘grammar’, selected by 34% of all of the respondents (second-

-year – 50%, third-year – 36%, fourth year – 17%),

• ‘time-limits’, indicated by 0,1% of all of the subjects (second-

-year – none, third-year – 0,1%, fourth year – 17%),

• ‘types of tasks’, indicated by 0,1% of all of the participants

(second-year – 25%, third-year – 0,1%, fourth year – 0%).


On the basis of the above-mentioned data, the authors concluded

that general vocabulary, military vocabulary and grammar posed

major difficulties. This piece of information seems to be of particular

significance, as it may help substantially when attempting to overcome

students’ language difficulties and thus aiming to master their

writing skills.

Finally, in order to obtain a much wider and therefore complete

picture of the outcome of this study, individual results of all the

participants have been presented below:


Table 3. Individual results of the participantsSu

bje

ctYe

ar

of

stu

dy

Imp

ort

ance

of

wri

tin

g

du

rin

g

stu

die

s

reas

on

Imp

ort

ance

of

wri

tin

g in

my

futu

re

job

reas

on

Imp

ort

ance

of

typ

es

of

com

po

siti

on

in m

y

futu

re jo

b:

a) p

riva

te e

mai

l

b) l

ett

er

of

en

qu

iry

c) le

tte

r o

f

com

pla

int

d) l

ett

er

of

app

licat

ion

e) a

sse

ssm

en

t

rep

ort

f) in

cid

en

t re

po

rt

I hav

e

pro

ble

ms

wit

h w

riti

ng

in M

ilita

ry

En

glis

h

Wh

at p

rob

lem

s?

Wh

at c

ou

ld h

elp

you

to

so

lve

the

m?

Ass

ess

me

nt

of

diffi

cult

y o

f ty

pe

s

of

com

po

siti

on

:

a) p

riva

te e

mai

l

b) l

ett

er

of

en

qu

iry

c) le

tte

r o

f

com

pla

int

d) l

ett

er

of

app

licat

ion

e) a

sse

ssm

en

t

rep

ort

f) in

cid

en

t re

po

rt

Wh

en

tak

ing

Wri

tin

g

STA

NA

G E

xam

I h

ad

pro

ble

ms

wit

h

12

imp

ort

ant

To p

ass

En

glis

him

po

rtan

tIt

will

be

my

bas

e

lan

gu

age

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

do

no

t kn

ow

I hav

e p

rob

lem

s

wit

h g

ram

mar

a) d

ifficu

lt

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) d

ifficu

lt

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

gra

mm

ar

22

imp

ort

ant

To c

om

mu

nic

ate

wit

h s

old

iers

fro

m

oth

er

cou

ntr

ies

imp

ort

ant

I wo

uld

like

to

go

on

mis

sio

n a

bro

ad

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

do

no

t kn

ow

Mo

re m

ilita

ry

voca

bu

lary

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) d

ifficu

lt

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

Vo

cab

ula

ry

mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

gra

mm

ar

32

imp

ort

ant

It r

esu

lts

fro

m

clo

se c

oo

pe

rati

on

wit

h o

the

r

cou

ntr

ies

imp

ort

ant

It r

esu

lts

fro

m

NA

TO

a) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) d

o n

ot

kno

w

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I do

no

t

agre

e

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) d

o n

ot

kno

w

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult


42

imp

ort

ant

imp

ort

ant

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) d

ifficu

lt

Mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

typ

e o

f ta

sk

52

imp

ort

ant

Th

ese

day

s E

ng

lish

is v

ery

imp

ort

ant

and

I lik

e t

his

lan

gu

age

a lo

t

imp

ort

ant

May

be

I w

ill u

se it

at w

ork

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

Lear

n a

lot

of

voca

bu

lary

an

d

ph

rase

s

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) d

ifficu

lt

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

Vo

cab

ula

ry

mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

62

imp

ort

ant

Do

cum

en

tati

on

in t

he

arm

y is

th

e

mo

st im

po

rtan

t

imp

ort

ant

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

I do

no

t h

ave

pro

ble

ms

bu

t I

cou

ld b

e b

ett

er

at w

riti

ng

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

72

imp

ort

ant

It is

a v

ery

use

ful

skill

imp

ort

ant

It is

a v

ery

use

ful

skill

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I do

no

t

kno

w

Wri

te m

ore

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

Vo

cab

ula

ry

mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

gra

mm

ar

82

imp

ort

ant

To p

ass

exa

ms

No

t

imp

ort

ant

Maj

ori

ty w

ill w

ork

in P

ola

nd

an

d w

ill

no

t h

ave

co

nta

cts

wit

h f

ore

ign

alli

es

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

I rat

he

r ag

ree

Po

or

kno

wle

dg

e

of

mili

tary

voca

bu

lary

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

Mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry


92

imp

ort

ant

Eve

ry s

old

ier

sho

uld

kn

ow

En

glis

h

imp

ort

ant

Eve

ry s

old

ier

sho

uld

kn

ow

En

glis

h

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r ag

ree

I hav

e p

rob

lem

s

wit

h g

ram

mar

and

th

inki

ng

up

pro

ble

ms

to w

rite

abo

ut.

Mo

de

l

com

po

siti

on

s

and

mo

de

l

pro

ble

ms

(par

agra

ph

s) w

ill

be

use

ful

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) d

ifficu

lt

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

Typ

e o

f ta

sk

102

imp

ort

ant

I will

use

it a

t w

ork

imp

ort

ant

Po

lan

d is

a

me

mb

er

of

NA

TO

an

d it

is

very

imp

ort

ant

to c

om

mu

nic

ate

wit

h o

ur

allie

s

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

Ign

ora

nce

of

som

e w

ord

s

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) d

ifficu

lt

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

Mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

gra

mm

ar

112

imp

ort

ant

May

be

I w

ill

hav

e t

o fi

ll in

th

e

do

cum

en

ts in

En

glis

h

imp

ort

ant

I will

hav

e t

o w

rite

rep

ort

s an

d o

the

r

do

cum

en

ts

a) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r ag

ree

Gra

mm

ar

mis

take

s,

inco

rre

ct f

orm

s

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) d

ifficu

lt

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

Mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

gra

mm

ar

typ

e o

f ta

sk

122

imp

ort

ant

Th

is v

oca

bu

lary

may

be

use

ful i

n

the

fu

ture

imp

ort

ant

It is

po

ssib

le t

hat

I will

hav

e t

o

con

tact

sb

fro

m

abro

ad

a) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I str

on

gly

agre

e

Mo

re p

ract

ice

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) d

ifficu

lt

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

Vo

cab

ula

ry

mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

gra

mm

ar

133

imp

ort

ant

It m

ay b

e u

sefu

l at

wo

rk in

th

e a

rmy

imp

ort

ant

It m

ay b

e u

sefu

l at

wo

rk in

th

e a

rmy

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I str

on

gly

dis

agre

e

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult


143

No

t

imp

ort

ant

Spe

akin

g is

mo

re

imp

ort

ant,

I ca

n

use

th

e In

tern

et

wh

en

I h

ave

pro

ble

ms

No

t

imp

ort

ant

Spe

akin

g is

mo

re

imp

ort

ant,

I ca

n

use

th

e In

tern

et

wh

en

I h

ave

pro

ble

ms

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

voca

bu

lary

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

Mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

153

imp

ort

ant

imp

ort

ant

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I do

no

t

kno

w

Wri

tin

g m

ore

com

po

siti

on

s

tog

eth

er

wit

h a

teac

he

r

a) d

ifficu

lt

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) d

ifficu

lt

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

Vo

cab

ula

ry

mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

gra

mm

ar

163

No

t

imp

ort

ant

We

sp

eak

mai

nly

No

t

imp

ort

ant

We

sp

eak

mai

nly

a) d

o n

ot

kno

w

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r ag

ree

I do

no

t kn

ow

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

173

No

t

imp

ort

ant

I can

alw

ays

use

the

Inte

rne

t o

r

lite

ratu

re w

he

n I

ne

ed

to

wri

te

I do

no

t

kno

w

It w

as n

ot

exp

lain

ed

wh

y w

e

ne

ed

it e

xact

ly

a) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

b) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

c) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

f) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

I str

on

gly

dis

agre

e

Focu

s m

ore

on

un

assi

ste

d w

ork

a) I

do

no

t kn

ow

b) I

do

no

t kn

ow

c) I

do

no

t kn

ow

d) I

do

no

t kn

ow

e) I

do

no

t kn

ow

f) I

do

no

t kn

ow

gra

mm

ar

183

imp

ort

ant

Be

cau

se o

f

STA

NA

G

imp

ort

ant

To g

oo

gle

pro

ble

ms

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) I

do

no

t kn

ow

f) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

I str

on

gly

dis

agre

e

ne

tflix

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

gra

mm

ar


193

imp

ort

ant

My

spac

ialis

atio

n

incl

ud

es

de

alin

g

wit

h A

me

rica

n

eq

uip

me

nt

imp

ort

ant

I may

ne

ed

it in

the

fu

ture

wh

en

coo

pe

rati

ng

wit

h

NA

TO

arm

ies

a) I

do

no

t kn

ow

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) I

do

no

t kn

ow

f) I

do

no

t kn

ow

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

I can

no

t th

ink

up

sto

rie

s,

con

coct

ing

is a

pro

ble

m

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) I

do

no

t kn

ow

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

tim

e-l

imit

20

3im

po

rtan

tIt

is a

bas

ic f

orm

of

no

n-d

ire

ct p

assi

ng

info

rmat

ion

. It

is im

po

rtan

t to

de

velo

p it

.

imp

ort

ant

Be

cau

se o

f a

larg

e n

um

be

r o

f

po

ten

tial

mis

sio

ns,

exe

rcis

es,

tra

inin

gs

abro

ad

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I str

on

gly

dis

agre

e

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

gra

mm

ar

21

3im

po

rtan

tIt

will

be

a u

sefu

l

skill

du

rin

g m

y

care

er

imp

ort

ant

To w

rite

re

po

rts

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

con

sort

ing

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) d

ifficu

lt

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

Mis

un

de

rsta

nd

ing

a ta

sk

22

3im

po

rtan

tTo

pas

s e

xam

sim

po

rtan

tC

oo

pe

rati

on

wit

h

fore

ign

co

un

trie

s

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

Bro

ade

r

kno

wle

dg

e o

f

voca

bu

lary

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

Mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

23

3im

po

rtan

tA

ll sk

ills

are

imp

ort

ant

imp

ort

ant

Pro

bab

ly I

will

hav

e t

o d

eal

wit

h f

ore

ign

eq

uip

me

nt,

tak

e

par

t in

exe

rcis

es,

trai

nin

gs

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I str

on

gly

dis

agre

e

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt


24

3im

po

rtan

tTo

su

bm

it

wri

tte

n r

ep

ort

s

on

mis

sio

ns

effi

cie

ntl

y

imp

ort

ant

I co

un

t o

n

mis

sio

ns

abro

ad

a) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

gra

mm

ar

25

3im

po

rtan

tIt

will

mak

e m

y

life

eas

ier

in t

he

futu

re

imp

ort

ant

It w

ill m

ake

my

care

er

eas

ier

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

I do

no

t lik

e

thin

kin

g u

p

sto

rie

s

a) d

ifficu

lt

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) d

ifficu

lt

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

Typ

e o

f ta

sk

26

3im

po

rtan

tIt

is r

eq

uir

ed

wh

en

com

mu

nic

atin

g

wit

h f

ore

ign

sold

iers

No

t

imp

ort

ant

Th

e m

ajo

rity

of

the

do

cum

en

ts

will

be

in P

olis

h

a) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

27

4im

po

rtan

tIt

will

be

use

ful

du

rin

g m

y ca

ree

r

imp

ort

ant

To c

om

mu

nic

ate

wit

h f

ore

ign

cou

ntr

ies

un

pro

ble

mat

ical

ly

a) I

do

no

t kn

ow

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

Lack

of

voca

bu

lary

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) d

ifficu

lt

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

Vo

cab

ula

ry

mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

28

4im

po

rtan

tI m

ay n

ee

d it

at

wo

rk

No

t

imp

ort

ant

Pro

bab

ly t

he

maj

ori

ty o

f

do

cum

en

ts w

ill b

e

in P

olis

h

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) I

do

no

t kn

ow

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

voca

bu

lary


29

4I d

o n

ot

kno

w

I do

ub

t if

I will

hav

e w

rite

com

man

ds

or

de

scri

be

mili

tary

inci

de

nts

at

wo

rk

No

t

imp

ort

ant

I will

no

t se

rve

in

the

arm

y

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) I

do

no

t kn

ow

f) I

do

no

t kn

ow

Mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

30

4im

po

rtan

tI m

ay n

ee

d it

du

rin

g c

are

er,

bu

t

ge

ne

ral E

ng

lish

will

be

mo

re

imp

ort

ant

than

mili

tary

imp

ort

ant

I will

ne

ed

wri

tin

g in

mili

tary

En

glis

h f

or

sure

,

bu

t g

en

era

;

En

glis

h w

ill b

e

mo

re c

om

mo

n,

ho

we

ver

mili

tary

En

glis

h m

ay b

e

also

use

ful

a) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

I do

no

t

kno

w

I ne

ed

to

ap

ply

mys

elf

mo

re

to w

riti

ng

and

sp

en

d

mo

re t

ime

on

wri

tin

g b

eca

use

wh

en

wri

tin

g

I fo

cus

on

my

han

dw

riti

ng

no

t

on

gra

mm

ar,

etc

.

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) d

ifficu

lt

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

Mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

tim

e-l

imit

31

4im

po

rtan

tIt

th

e e

lem

en

t

req

uir

ed

fo

r

pro

mo

tio

n

imp

ort

ant

It is

pro

bab

le t

hat

I

will

hav

e t

o w

rite

a

lett

er

or

a re

po

rt in

En

glis

h t

o m

y C

O

a) I

do

no

t kn

ow

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r ag

ree

I hav

e p

rob

lem

s

wit

h g

ram

mar

.

Som

e c

ou

rse

s

or

ind

ivid

ual

me

eti

ng

s w

ith

a

teac

he

r m

ay b

e

he

lpfu

l

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

Vo

cab

ula

ry

gra

mm

ar

32

4N

ot

imp

ort

ant

Pro

bab

ly I

will

no

t

ne

ed

it d

uri

ng

my

mili

tary

car

ee

r

No

t

imp

ort

ant

Re

adin

g is

mo

re

imp

ort

ant,

be

cau

se a

lot

of

inst

ruct

ion

s ar

e

wri

tte

n in

Po

lish

a) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

b) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

c) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

f) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

I str

on

gly

agre

e

I do

no

t kn

ow

a) d

ifficu

lt

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) d

ifficu

lt

d) d

ifficu

lt

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

Gra

mm

ar

tim

e-l

imit


33

4N

ot

imp

ort

ant

So f

ar I

hav

e n

ot

ne

ed

ed

wri

tin

g

du

rin

g s

erv

ice

.

On

th

e c

on

trar

y,

I hav

e n

ee

de

d

spe

akin

g, l

iste

nin

g

and

re

adin

g.

No

t

imp

ort

ant

My

frie

nd

s h

ave

ne

ver

wri

tte

n

anyt

hin

g in

En

glis

h

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

c) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

f) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

34

4I d

o n

ot

kno

w

Wri

tin

g is

no

t

imp

ort

ant

I do

no

t

kno

w

I do

no

t kn

ow

wh

ere

I w

ill w

ork

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) I

do

no

t kn

ow

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I str

on

gly

dis

agre

e

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) d

ifficu

lt

c) d

ifficu

lt

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

Vo

cab

ula

ry

mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

35

4N

ot

imp

ort

ant

I hav

e n

ot

ne

ed

ed

it s

o f

ar

I do

no

t

kno

w

It d

ep

en

ds

on

my

assi

gn

me

nt

a) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

f) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

Mo

re r

ead

y-

mad

e f

orm

ula

s

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

gra

mm

ar

36

4im

po

rtan

tW

riti

ng

re

po

rts

is

very

use

ful d

uri

ng

mili

tary

car

ee

r

I do

no

t

kno

w

I do

no

t kn

ow

if

I will

use

mili

tary

En

glis

h

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

f) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

I str

on

gly

dis

agre

e

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

Mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry

37

4im

po

rtan

tI w

ant

to b

e a

ble

to w

rite

imp

ort

ant

To w

rite

, fo

r

inst

ance

re

po

rts

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) im

po

rtan

t

d) i

mp

ort

ant

e) i

mp

ort

ant

f) im

po

rtan

t

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

Wri

te m

ore

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) n

ot

diffi

cult

f) n

ot

diffi

cult

Mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry


Source: Authors’ own elaboration on the basis of the conducted research.

38

4im

po

rtan

tI t

hin

k th

at a

n

offi

cer

sho

uld

kno

w m

ilita

ry

ph

rase

s an

d

be

ab

le t

o u

se

the

m w

he

n

wri

tin

g r

ep

ort

s o

r

me

mo

ran

da

I do

no

t

kno

w

I th

ink

that

wri

tin

g

skill

will

be

use

ful m

ain

ly o

n

mis

sio

ns

abro

ad

a) im

po

rtan

t

b) i

mp

ort

ant

c) I

do

no

t kn

ow

d) n

ot

imp

ort

ant

e) I

do

no

t kn

ow

f) I

do

no

t kn

ow

I rat

he

r

dis

agre

e

Lack

of

voca

bu

lary

a) n

ot

diffi

cult

b) n

ot

diffi

cult

c) n

ot

diffi

cult

d) n

ot

diffi

cult

e) d

ifficu

lt

f) d

ifficu

lt

Mili

tary

vo

cab

ula

ry


Conclusions and implications

Taking into consideration all the responses concerning the importance

of Military English, it seems to be clear that cadets mainly aim to pass

the STANAG 6001 examination and thus graduate from the academy

and get their commissions. However, what should be emphasised is the

fact that numerous military students consider this issue from a broader

perspective and thus treat writing as a useful skill itself. Furthermore,

for those soldiers who take into consideration various missions abroad,

writing plays a significant role in communication and their ability to

perform professional duties.

From the authors’ point of view, the approach that rules out the

possibility of using English at graduates’ work is not entirely justified

and desirable. First of all, such an attitude may contribute to lower

motivation when learning to write effectively. What is more, as military

graduates are not decisive in terms of their future assignments, whereas

cooperation between the Polish army and NATO members gradually

increases, opportunities regarding international encounters and

contacts should not be doubted.

When it comes to self-assessment as regards the respondents’

writing difficulties, the results obtained in the survey are satisfying, as

military students’ confidence in their writing skills increases over the

course of their studies. The more experience they get, the more self-

assured they become. What is more, the authors also assume that the

cadets’ positive attitude towards this ability influences their willingness

to practice it. However, the most qualitative data provide information

concerning the students’ solutions and expectations regarding their

writing problems. As the respondents were mature and experienced

learners, they were undoubtedly aware of their language and educational

needs, including language learning styles. That is why the respondents’


opinions as regards the possible ways of dealing with writing problems

constitute essential pieces of feedback.

Finally, the results obtained by the authors indicate what military

students’ needs are, and they can be guidelines for military teachers when

it comes to the areas that ought to be practiced more intensively. Writing

always poses a challenge for students, as it requires extensive application

of various elements of students’ knowledge, such as grammatical

rules, appropriate vocabulary, etc. Only when all of these elements are

combined can the target text meet the proper writing standards and thus

become coherent and correct. The better the students are prepared to

tackle their writing problems, the better their writing performance can

be. As a corollary, this might be the fundamental role of Military English

teachers, i.e. to equip their students with successful writing strategies,

focus on students’ needs as regards general and military vocabulary,

and grammar practice. In other words, knowing students’ writing issues

may not only hasten the learning/teaching process but also contribute

to the development of students’ writing skills.


References

Barab, S., & Duffy, T. (2012). From practice fields to community of practice.

In S. Land, D. Jonassen (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments

(pp. 29–65). New York: Routledge.

Belcher, D. (2009). What ESP Is and Can Be: An Introduction. In D. Belcher (Ed.),

English for Specific Purposes in Theory and Practice (pp. 1–20). Michigan: University

of Michigan Press.

Cannon, G. (1989). Abbreviations and Acronyms in English Word-Formation.

American Speech, 64(2), 99–127.

Decyzja Nr 73/MON Ministra Obrony Narodowej z dnia 26 maja 2020 r. w sprawie

kształcenia i egzaminowania ze znajomości języków obcych w resorcie obrony

narodowej (2020). Retrieved from

https://wsnjo.wp.mil.pl/pl/pages/dokumenty-normatywne-2020-05-05-c/.

Accessed November 2020.

Donesch-Jezo, E. (24–25 February 2012). English for Specific Purposes: What does

it mean and why is it different from teaching General English? Paper presentation

at the Confluence II: International Scientific Conference, Tulsiramji Gaikwad-Patil

College of Engineering and Technology, Nagpur, India.

Dudley-Evans, T., & St. John, M. J. (1998). Development in English for Specific

Purposes: A Multi-Disciplinary Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Harley, H. (2006). English Words: A Linguistic Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell

Publishing.


Hoadley, Ch. (2012). What is a Community of Practice and How Can We Support

It? In S. Land, D. Jonassen (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments

(pp. 286–300). New York: Routledge.

Holmes, J., & Meyerhoff, M. (1999). The Community of Practice: Theories and

methodologies in language and gender research. Language in society, 28(2),

173–183.

https://www.wat.edu.pl/ksztalcenie/rekrutacja/studia-wojskowe/zycie-

studenta-podchorazego/ksztalcenie-wojskowe/. Accessed November 2020.

https://www.wat.edu.pl/en/military-university-of-technology/mut/. Accessed

November 2020.

https://www.wojsko-polskie.pl/wat/studia-wojskowe-czym-roznia-sie-studia-

wojskowe-od-cywilnych/. Accessed November 2020.

https://www.wat.edu.pl/ksztalcenie/rekrutacja/studia-wojskowe/zycie-

studenta-podchorazego/przykladowy-plan-dnia/. Accessed November 2020.

https://e-learning.wat.edu.pl/. Accessed November 2020.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation.

New York: Cambridge University Press.

Li, L. C., Grimshaw, J. M., Nielsen, C., Judd, M., Coyte, P. C., & Graham, I. D.

(2009). Evolution of Wenger’s concept of community of practice. Implementation

science, 4(1).


Long, M. (2005). Second language needs analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Lopez Rua, P. (2004). Acronyms & Co.: A typology of typologies. Estudios Ingleses

de la Universidad Complutense, 12, 109–129.

Malenica, F., & Fabijanić, I. (2013). Abbreviations in English Military Terminology.

Brno Studies in English, 39(1), 59–87.

Model egzaminu z języka angielskiego Poziom 2 STANAG 6001 (2019).

Retrieved from https://wsnjo.wp.mil.pl/pl/pages/modele-egzaminacyjne-2020-

05-12-z/. Accessed November 2020.

Model egzaminu z języka angielskiego Poziom 3 STANAG 6001 (2018).

Retrieved from https://wsnjo.wp.mil.pl/pl/pages/modele-egzaminacyjne-2020-

05-12-z/. Accessed November 2020.

Orna-Montesinos, C. (2013). English as an International Language in the Military:

A Study of Attitudes. LSP Journal, 4(1), 87–105.

Ostermann, A. (2008). Communities of practice. Retrieved from https://

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/9781405186407.wbiecc106. Accessed

November 2020.

Plesca. G. (7 June 2016). The Essence of English for Specific Purposes. Paper

presentation at the International Scientific Conference: Perspectives and

Problems of Integration in Space – European Research and Education Center,

Bogdan Petriceicu Hasdeu State University, Cahul, Moldova.


Ramowy Program Nauczania Języka Angielskiego w Siłach Zbrojnych RP

Edycja III (2019). Retrieved from https://wsnjo.wp.mil.pl/pl/pages/dokumenty-

normatywne-2020-05-05-c/. Accessed November 2020.

STANAG (2009). Standardization Agreement (STANAG). Retrieved from

https://wsnjo.wp.mil.pl/pl/pages/dokumenty-normatywne-2020-05-05-c/.

Accessed November 2020.

the place of writing in english for military purposes

Documents